Workshop on Manufactured Sand, Stavanger, Norway 30~31 October 2008 : FA: Competitive constructions : SP 2.3 Production of high quality manufactured aggregate for concrete

Workshop on Manufactured Sand, Stavanger, Norway

30–31 October 2008

SINTEF Building and Infrastructure Børge Johannes Wigum (editor)

COIN project report 79 – 2015

Børge Johannes Wigum (editor)

Workshop on Manufactured Sand, Stavanger, Norway 30–31 October 2008

FA: Competitive constructions

SP 2.3 Production of high quality manufactured aggregate for concrete

Project no.: 102000442-5 Photo, cover: «Pipes», iStock ISSN 1891–1978 (online) ISBN 978-82-536-1496-0 (pdf)

© Copyright SINTEF Building and Infrastructure 2015

The material in this publication is covered by the provisions of the Norwegian Copyright Act.

Without any special agreement with SINTEF Building and Infrastructure, any copying and making available of the material is only allowed to the extent that this is permitted by law or allowed through an agreement with Kopinor, the Reproduction Rights Organisation for Norway.

Any use contrary to legislation or an agreement may lead to a liability for damages and con- fiscation, and may be punished by fines or imprisonment.

Address: Forskningsveien 3 B POBox 124 Blindern N-0314 OSLO Tel: +47 73 59 30 00 Fax: +47 22 69 94 38 www.sintef.no/byggforsk www.coinweb.no

Cooperation partners / Consortium Concrete Innovation Centre (COIN)

Kværner Engineering Contact: Jan-Diederik Advocaat

Email: [email protected] Tel: +47 67595050

Saint Gobain Weber Contact: Geir Norden

Email: [email protected] Tel: +47 22887700

Norcem AS

Contact: Terje Rønning Email: [email protected]

Mapei AS

Contact: Trond Hagerud Email: [email protected] Tel: +47 69972000

SINTEF Building and Infrastructure Contact: Tor Arne Hammer

Email: [email protected] Tel: +47 73596856

Skanska Norge AS Contact: Sverre Smeplass

Email: [email protected]

Norwegian Public Roads Administration Contact: Kjersti K. Dunham

Email: [email protected] Tel: +47 22073940

Unicon AS

Contact: Stein Tosterud Email: [email protected] Tel: +47 22309035

Veidekke Entreprenør ASA Contact: Christine Hauck

Email: [email protected]

MANUFACTURED SAND WORKSHOP

STAVANGER, NORWAY, OCTOBER 30

AND 31

2008

S U M M A RY O F P R E S E N T A T I O N S

COIN Version

November 2008

Introduction

As part of the COIN project, an International Workshop on the topic of production and use of manufactured sand aggregates was held at Hummeren hotel in Stavanger, Norway, on October 30^th and 31^st 2008..

The motivation for this workshop is the increasing miss balance between the need for aggregates in the society and the availability of traditionally suitable geologic sources. We see a strong need for developing and implementing technology that can enable the use of alternative resources, reduce the need for transport and present zero waste concepts for the aggregate and concrete industry.

The main aim of this workshop was to create opportunity for professional development, for information sharing and dissemination. We wanted this workshop to be an arena for interactive exchange of experiences between the participant., regarding one of the following topics:

• Sustainability and environmental challenges

• Geological and mineralogical issues

• Production (extraction, crushing, sieving, washing)

• Use of manufactured sand in concrete; mix design

• Characterization and testing of fines

• Standards and specifications

• Alternative utilization of fines

• Cases

In total 25 participants from 9 countries participated in the workshop, where a total of 18 lectures were presented. The participations represented various parties of the aggregate business, from production to utilisation, including; geologists, aggregate producers, machinery engineers (producers and users), concrete admixture producers, researchers and concrete producers.

This report contains the slides presented at the workshop, including short abstracts for some of the presentations.

Jouni Mähönen Metso Minerals Finland

Jarmo Eloranta Metso Minerals Finland

Guðmundur Símonarsson Björgun Iceland

Makoto Hashimoto Kotobuki Engineering and Manufacturing Co. Ltd Japan Takato Kaya Kotobuki Engineering and Manufacturing Co. Ltd Japan

Torben Jepsen JGO-Betong Norway

Peer Richard Neeb NGU Norway

Dan Arve Juvik Rescon Mapei Norway

Bård Pedersen NorStone Norway

Svein Willy Danielsen SINTEF Byggforsk Norway

Odd Hotvedt Kolo Veidekke Norway

Lillian Uthus Mathisen Kolo Veidekke Norway

Gaute Veland NorStone Norway

Børge JohannesWigum Norwegian University of Science and Technology Norway Roar Nålsund Norwegian University of Science and Technology Norway

Lukasz Debny Grace Poland

Niklas Skoog Sand & Grus AB Jehander Sweden

Hans-Erik Gram Cementa Sweden

Bjørn Schouenborg CBI Betonginstitutet Sweden

Sven-Henrik Norman Metso Minerals Sweden

Per Hedvall Sandvik Sweden

Participants:

Upper row from left: Sven-Henrik Norman, Jarmo Eloranta, Guðmundur Símonarsson, Chris Rogers, Børge Johannes Wigum, Magnus Evertsson, Per Hedvall, Bjørn Schouenborg.

Lower row from left: Jouni Mähönen, Gaute Veland, Svein Willy Danielsen, Bård Pedersen, Dan Arve Juvik, Odd Hotvedt, Niklas Skoog, Lukasz Debny, Hans-Erik Gram, Makoto Hashimoto, Hugo Pettingell, Jose M. Cuevas, Takato Kaya.

In front from left: Per-Richard Neeb and Roar Nålsund.

Not present: Lillian Uthus Mathisen and Torben Jepsen.

Organizers

COIN - Concrete Innovation Centre

The workshop is arranged as part of the COIN project. COIN stands for Concrete Innovation Centre and is one of 14 Norwegian centres for research-based innovation (CRIs) that was established by the Research Council of Norway in 2006. The vision of COIN is creation of more attractive concrete buildings and constructions. Attractiveness implies – among others – aesthetics, functionality, sustainability, energy efficiency and cost efficiency during the whole service life. The primary goal is to fulfil this vision by bringing the development a major leap forward by more fundamental understanding of the mechanisms in order to develop advanced materials, efficient construction techniques and durable design concepts combined with more environmentally friendly material production. The corporate partners are leading multinational companies in the cement and building industry and the aim of COIN is to increase their value creation and strengthen their research activities in Norway. COIN will run from 2007 to 2014 with a

Peer R. Neeb, Geological Survey of Norway; Sustainable management of aggregate recourses in Norway, extraction and export.

23-39

Odd Hotvedt, Kolo Veidekke; Manufactured sand – Two cases; The Concrete Dam;

“Førrevassdammen”, 1982-1986 & Norsk Stein 1993. 41-54

Jarmo Eloranta, Metso; Barmac/HP sand. Case in US. Tests run during May and August 2006

(Soft rock). 55-64

Björn Schouenborg, CBI, A group in the SP group; Microstructure versus mechanical properties and influence on aggregate production.

65-86

Niklas Skoog, Sand & Grus AB Jehander; Manufactured sand in concrete. Experience from

laboratory and full scale tests in Göteborg. 87-93

Chris Rogers: Experience with Manufactured Sands in Canada. 95-111 Sven-Henrik Norman, Metso; Air Classification. A method to adjust fine aggregate gradiation. 113-121

Per Hedvall, Sandvik; Sandvik Sand. 123-131

Makoto Hashimoto, Kotobuki Engineering and Manufacturing Co. Ltd; Kemco Dry Sand-Making

System V7. To turn surplus crusher dust into premium sand. 133-150 Magnus Evertsson, Chalmers University of Technology: Development of Crushing Technology for

Manufactured Sand.

151-167

Bård Pedersen, NorStone; A preliminary study on manufactured sand in concrete. Effect of

grading and fines content. 169-175

Lukasz Debny, Grace; Comparison of rheological and mechanical properties of mortars

prepared with manufactured and natural fine aggreagates. 177-182 Dan Arve Juvik, Rescon Mapei; Casting of concrete made by crushed aggregate. 183-198 Jouni Mähönen, Metso: Example of how to evaluate shape of fine aggregate. Sand flow cone

NZS 3111:1986.

199-203

Hans-Erik Gram, Björn Lagerblad and Mikael Westerholm, Cementa and CBI;

Characterization of crushed rock sands in Sweden. 205-229

Chris Rogers; A flakiness test for fine aggregate. 231-269

Jose M. Cuevas, ADICO; Limitation of the fine particles content in the aggregates for 270-277

- why, - where, - how?

Svein Willy Danielsen

SINTEF Building and Infrastructure 1

Svein Willy Danielsen

SINTEF Building and Infrastructure

By considering the development in construction activities, we can estimate that close to 80% of the sand/gravel ever taken out of the nature, has been

d i ti

consumed in our generation.

How do we continue from there?

materials will be one of materials will be one of

the important global market drivers in the

years to come

SINTEF Building and Infrastructure 3

y

(Prof. Roger Flanagan UK)

Mineral aggregates can only be extracted where nature has

placed them

So quarries may have to be located in the countryside where constraints against development are intense.

Or alternatively in

densely populated areas

with protests against

where society needs where society needs them

Which may result in

SINTEF Building and Infrastructure 5

traffic pollution and excess use of energy

Some international key figures

„ Global demand for aggregates is some 15 billion tons/year

„ Expected to increase to Expected to increase to 22 billion, where China alone will 22 billion, where China alone will account for some 6 billion

„ European aggregate industry produced >3 billion tons in 2005, at a value of >40 billion €

„ 47 % sand/gravel, 45 % crushed hard rock

„ The remaining part was recycled and artificial materials

„ Production took place in 28.000 quarriesProduction took place in 28.000 quarries

„ European concrete production is almost 600 mill m3, and

uses approx 1,2 billion tons of aggregates per year

Total of 5 bill tons per year Europe wide Total of 5 bill tons per year Europe wide

„

Assuming an average equivalent road transport distance of 40 km

200 billion ton-km per year for aggregate transport

„ 2 questions:

SINTEF Building and Infrastructure 7

„

Where do we find these resources on a long range?

„

What is the CO2 emission per ton-km?

Østfold

Vest-Agder Dyrka mark

Skog 88.3

197.6

Oppland Sør-Trøndelag Nordland Telemark Møre og Romsdal Akershus Sogn og Fjordane Rogaland Aust-Agder

Hordaland Annet

283.5 197.9 211.8

374.4 448.6

491.3 627.1

703.9 765.9

832 5

SINTEF Building and Infrastructure 9

0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000

Finnmark Hedmark Buskerud Troms Nord-Trøndelag Oppland

(mill. m³) 832.5

903.9 956.2

1256.9

1723.9 1875

European aggregate statistics 2005 (UEPG), some selected countries

Mill tons Sand/

gravel

Crushed hard rock

Recycled and artificial

TOTAL Quarries

Norway 15 38 0,2 53,2 4600

Sweden 23 49 8,1 80,1 1840

Germany 263 174 76 513 3180

UK 124 85 68 277 1300

TOTAL All

1445,4 1362,2 237,8 3045,4 28339

Norway 72 <<1 1,8 16

Sweden 61 10 2,6 6,5

Netherlands 8 42 1,6 0,7

Germany 34 9 17 11

UK 31 20 9 4 6

SINTEF Building and Infrastructure 11

UK 31 20 9 4,6

France 54 2,5 13,5 9,5

Spain 65 <<1 15 6,8

Development in sand/gravel versus crushed rock (Norway)

Production value mill. NOK ^{Mill. t}

2002

Year 1982 1991 1997 2000 2002

Sand/

gravel

1000 900 900 760 590 15

Crushed hard rock

800 1350 1859 1825 1950 35

Total 1800 1920 2759 2585 2540 50

% sand/

gravel

56 47 33 29 23

polluting transport

„ How do we handle that when existing resources are g depleted – and access to new ones are limited?

„ “Secondary materials”, and the use of all available sizes – for a zero-waste production

„ Adaptation of requirements and materials design to the local resources available – instead of standard “ideal”

designs

C ( d t ) i t ll t i l

SINTEF Building and Infrastructure 13

„ Can we (and must we) invent an all-new materials technology?

„ Densely populated areas – combining sub surface quarrying with the cities’ need for underground space?

Sustainability:

Resource management is the key

key

– access to resources the main challenge.

Any encroach upon nature should be

Any encroach upon nature should be

justified by increased values for the

society, both relating to the products

made and to the area left for later use.

1. Inventory and planning 2. Quarrying and production

3. Use of aggregates in construction 4. Reclamation of mined-out area

SINTEF Building and Infrastructure 15

Inventory and planning:

1. Geological mapping 2. Regulatory issues

3 Pl i f th f t l ti d i

3. Planning of the future exploration and quarrying

4. Planning of the future land reclamation

Quarries will always be temporary – the business is to extract resources not to business is to extract resources, not to possess land

SINTEF Building and Infrastructure 17

But society deserves a well planned and performed land reclamation

Aggregate technology

Materialstechnology Materialstechnology

•The useof aggregates

The basic interdependencyin aggregate technology

Productiontechnology

•The processingof aggregates

Knowledge of geology

•The basisfor aggregates sources

• Handling and transport Handling and transport

• Production – crushing, classifying

• Storing

• Waste depositing

SINTEF Building and Infrastructure 19

p g

Use of aggregates in construction

Concrete mix design, performance based or performance based or standard

requirements?

Performance analyses Quality control

Materials proportioning

„ New developed technology opens new possibilities p gy p p

„ Aggregate production

„ Concrete proportioning

„ Utilise the properties of different rock types

„ More design opportunities

„ Have a more industrialised production

„ Less surprises

SINTEF Building and Infrastructure 21

„ Less surprises

„ Utilise surplus sizes

„ Mass balance

„ Less need for fines deposits –”no-waste production”

Pre-conditions to make concrete with exclusively crushed

aggregates:

Suitable rock type

Control of the 0-2 mm grading

Cubicity in the medium grain size fraction Specific proportioning

– not just replace the natural sand

SINTEF Building and Infrastructure 23

Crusher Particle Shape

„ Secondary and

Tertiary Compression

„ BarmacSAND™

SINTEF Building and Infrastructure 25

Splitting strength as a function of w/c ratio.

Gravitational –

”GI”

SINTEF Building and Infrastructure 27

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

ikterest (%) 70

Specially designed 0-2 mm gradations (crushed Skien) used in the research

programme

0 10 20 30

(%) 40 70

80 90 100

8 5,6 4 2 1 0,5 0,25 0,125 0,063

Sikt (mm)

S

Aggregates used:

•Skien crushed 2-5

50 60 70 80 90 100

Sikterest

•Skien crushed 5-8

•Natural sand 0-8

•Skien filler

•Limestone filler

FA cement Limestone filler Limestone filler Gneiss filler (1) Gneiss filler (2)

Filler fraction in natural sand

SINTEF Building and Infrastructure 29

Future action and research

1. Tools for mineral resource management 2. Concepts and technologies for optimum

production and use

•Utilisation of secondary aggregates /marginal

•Utilisation of secondary aggregates /marginal resources

•Concepts to constantly obtain mass balance (100%

utilisation)

•Concepts to use more kinds of local materials, all new materials technology?

SINTEF Building and Infrastructure 31

gy

•Integrated plant concepts, with cost effective production

•More economically feasible subsurface quarrying, combined with establishing underground space

Crushed hard rock aggregates for concrete

•

A need

• A challenge

Sustainable management of aggregate resources in Norway aggregate resources in Norway,

extraction and export

Peer-Richard Neeb, Stavanger 30. October 2008 Geological Survey of Norway

Geological Survey of Norway Goals 2008-2012

Better knowledge of nature and environment

Economic growth in the mineral industri Better planning and land management

International co-operation and development

industrial minerals (e.g. limestone, quartz and nepheline syenite)

building stone derived from dimension stone (e.g. larvikite, granite and flagstone) Five categories of raw materials are distinguished:

raw materials for construction (sand, gravel, crushed rock and clay)

metallic ores (iron, nickel and titanium oxide) energy minerals (coal).

Mineral raw materials in use

• 51 million tonnes hard rock.

• 15 million tonnes sand and gravel.

• Export sales: € 83 million.

• 13 million tonnes exported.

• 640 operators, ranging from

small enterprises to international companies.

small enterprises to international companies.

• Provides the backbone of many communities.

• Export from coastal areas.

• Potential for further growth.

Information on resources – Data acquisition

• Fieldwork, mapping

• Laboratory investigations Laboratory investigations

– Los Angeles method – Polished Stone Value – Nordic abrasion value – Micro-deval

– Microscopy – Etc.

• Data interpretation

• Data presentation

LegendPERMIANROCKS(OSLO REGION)(250to290million years)CALEDONIAN ROCKS(400to650millionyears)PRECAMBRIANROCKS(BASEMENT)IMPORTANTNORWEGIANAGGREGATEDEPOSITSINPRODUCTION(600to2900million years)DEVONIAN ROCKS(350to400millionyears)Nordmarkite, larvikite, graniteBasalt,rhombeporphyryGranite,trondhjemiteGabbro,anorthosite, amphiboliteSchist,micaceous slatesGreenstoneSandstone, schistMarbleGraniteGabbro,anorthosite, amphiboliteBasalt,rhyoliteSandstone, micaceous schistGneiss,migmatiteSandstone , conglomerateAggregate productionAggregateforexport 2005Skien,gneissHimberg/Freste,syeniteHellevik,anorthositeHausvik, gneissDirdal, gneissEspevik,graniteHyllestad TrondhjemiteAusterpollenGranite/gneissRausandgneissand LiaLøddingensyeniteBergnesetgabbroBallangen, gabbroHønefossgneissBrekke,gneissDal, gneissFjordstein, GabbroKragerø, gabbroOSLOÅlesund, gneissVisnes, ecogiteViken/Fræna, gneissHalsvik, gneissBremanger, DyrstadBremanger, GulestøsandstoneSandstone-FlorøJelsa, gneissTau,QuartzdioriteEikefet, gneissJuve,graniteVinterbro,gneissFeiring,gneissSTAVANGEROttersbo,quartziteBjugn, gneissNord-Fosen, gneissMosjøen, gabbroVassfjelletgabbroTRONDHEIMBODØ Kvalsund,Bø,gabbroSortland, gneissTromsø,gneissquartziteBjørnevatn,gneiTROMSØHedrum /Tjølling/Svartbukt, larvikiteSand/gravelfor export 2005Årdal,sand/gravelHelle,sand/gravelØrsjødal,sand/gravelFrafjord,sand/gravel

Consumption pr. inhabitant:11 tonns pr year

830 tonns aggregates through 75 years

8,1 3,1

11,2 tonns aggregates

years

31 %

12 % 19 % 38 %

Road Making Asphalt Concrete Other uses

16 % 9 %

51 % 24 %

Road Making Asphalt Concrete

Export value

NOK 6,1 billion, 762 million EUR.

Coal

Eksport value 2007

Talc/soapstone Quartz/quartzite Dolomite Nepheline …

Iron Olivine Ilmenite Natural stone Aggregate/gravel Carbonate

Peat Graphite Nickel Feldspar Slate/flagstone

/ p

To roads and concrete in Europa To roads and concrete in Europa

Bedrock map of Norway with important aggregate

deposits

Legend

PERMIAN ROCKS (OSLO REGION) (250 to 290 million years)

DEVONIAN ROCKS (350 to 400 million years)

Nordmarkite, larvikite, granite Basalt, rhomb-porphyry

Sandstone, conglomerate Mosjøen, gabbro

BODØ

21 hard rock aggregate CALEDONIAN ROCKS

(400 to 650 million years)

PRECAMBRIAN ROCKS (BASEMENT) (600 to 2900 million years)

Granite, trondhjemite Gabbro, anorthosite, amphibolite Schist , micaceous slate Greenstone Sandstone, schist Marble

Granite

Gabbro, anorthosite, amphibolite Basalt, rhyolite Sandstone, micaceous schist Hyllestad

Trondhjemite

Gudvangen, anorthosite Rausand gneiss

and Lia

Ålesund, gneiss Visnes, ecogite Viken/Fræna, gneiss

Halsvik, gneiss Bremanger, Dyrstad Bremanger, Gulestø sandstone Sandstone-Florø

Ottersbo, quartzite Bjugn, gneiss

Nord-Fosen, gneiss

Vassfjellet gabbro TRONDHEIM

Ørsjødal, sand/gravel Ørsjødal, sand/gravel

21 hard rock aggregate 4 sand/gravel

Reserves 3000 mill.

tonnes

10 topp aggregate producers

IMPORTANT NORWEGIAN AGGREGATE DEPOSITS IN PRODUCTION

Gneiss, migmatite

Aggregate production

Aggregate for export 2007 Himberg/Freste,

syenite Espevik, granite

Austerpollen

Granite/gneiss Hønefoss

gneiss Dal, gneiss

OSLO , g

Jelsa, gneiss Tau, Quartzdiorite Eikefet, gneiss Askøy, gneiss

Juve, granite Vinterbro, gneiss

Feiring, gneiss BERGEN

STAVANGER Helle, sand/gravel Årdal, sand/gravel Årdal, sand/gravel Helle, sand/gravel

Exportvalue 660 mill. NOK/83 mill EUR Offshore aggregate 2,0 mill. tonnes

NORGEFINLAND0.002(0.004)Russland0.027(0.003)Kalingrad(0.01)FÆRØENE0.121(0.11)1.80(1.47)FRANKRIKE0.43(0.27)POLEN0.329(0.17)Latvia0.091(0)TSJEKKIA0.0003(0.0005)BELGIA0.112(0.006)LUXEMBOURG0.065TYSKLAND3.57(3.26)NEDERLAND2.21(1.67)ISLAND0.118(0.11)OFFSHORENORGE2.1(2.12)STOR-BRITANIAIRLAND0Aggregate/armourstone 11,5 mill tonnsSand/gravel 0.2 mill tonnsExport value 463 mill NOK/58 mill EUROffshore-aggregate 2,1 mill tonnsNORGEFINLAND0.002(0.004)Russland0.027(0.003)Kalingrad(0.01)FÆRØENE0.121(0.11)1.80(1.47)FRANKRIKE0.43(0.27)POLEN0.329(0.17)Latvia0.091(0)TSJEKKIA0.0003(0.0005)BELGIA0.112(0.006)LUXEMBOURG0.065TYSKLAND3.57(3.26)NEDERLAND2.21(1.67)ISLAND0.118(0.11)OFFSHORENORGE2.1(2.12)STOR-BRITANIAIRLAND0Aggregate/armourstone 11,5 mill tonnsSand/gravel 0.2 mill tonnsExport value 463 mill NOK/58 mill EUROffshore-aggregate 2,1 mill tonns

Norsk Stein, Jelsa Year production :

18 %

Aggregates - Norwegian export (incl. offshore)

2007 (x1000 tons)

4.9 mill. tonnes i 2007 8 mill. tonnes 2009 10 mill. tonnes 2010

22 %

41 %

18 %

19 %

Concrete Roads Offshore Other

Norwegian export of aggregates 2007 (2006)

2007 (2006)

Eksport av grus og pukk

(x 1000 tonn)

2 0…

Oster pukk og sand, Ekefet, Hordaland NorStone, Tau, Strand kommune, Rogaland

15

Norges ledende bergverk

innen tilslagsproduksjon

Tilgjengelig forekomst:

– ca. 350 mill. tonn

17

www.ngu.no

Sand, gravel

and aggregate

deposits of

regional interest

• Screendumps

• Screendumps

Sand and gravel

Very important deposit Important deposit Less important deposit

Potential areas for utilisation Gravel

Chrushed rock

Case study: Espevik

•Annual production: 1.1 mill tonnes

•80-90% export

•Reserves for 4-5 years

•Relocation and expansion plans: Såt Relocation and expansion plans: Såt

Såt

Bedrock map of Såt

area

Competing land use interests

• NIMBY

• Urbanisation

• Conservation acts

• Tourism in unspoiled areas

• Tourism in unspoiled areas

• Sustainable management requires balanced land use planning.

• Land use planning requires unbiased

Conclusions

• Aggregate industry has potential for further growth in Norway if the actors meet the growth in Norway, if the actors meet the necessary environmental standards.

• Accept from community requires:

– Geological knowledge: Where is the resource?

– Transparency: Easy public access to information Transparency: Easy public access to information on mineral resources.

– Holistic approach: Resource issues balanced

against other types of land use.

attention attention

www.ngu . no /grusogpukk

1.300 meter. The concrete volume is 250.000 m . The dam is situated at the high mountain at 1.000 meter above sea level in Rogaland country. It belongs to Statkraft Ulla-Førre-plant which is the biggest hydro power plant in Europe. By reason of the tough weather conditions at the construction site, the construction of the dam could only be executed at the summer months.

Not any natural aggregate resource was available close enough and all aggregate for the concrete production had to be produced at the site. Stone for the production of manufactured sand was take out in a quarry close to the site. The rock was a gneiss-granite.

In addition to the concrete for the dam, there was also produced some 50.000 m³ of normal construction concrete for different use at the hydro power plant.

The production plant for the manufactured sand was based at three crushing steps. The final step was a horizontal impact crusher with horizontal shaft (Hazemag APK 1313). The separation was done in a wet process. The aggregate was split in the following fractions:

0,04 / 1 mm, 1 / 4 mm, 4 / 10 mm, 10 /30 mm, 30 / 60 mm and 60 / 120 mm. The separation down to 4 mm was done by normal wet screening. The separation at 1 mm was done in a Rheax column and the separation at 0,04 mm was done by cyclones and lamella classifiers. The speed of the impact crusher was regulated between 30 and 55 meter per second in periphery speed to get balance in the volume of the fines gradings. High speed made high production of the finest grading, but also high consumption of wearing steel in the crushers. In general there was an overproduction of the grading 1 / 1 mm. This was a consequence of the mineral composition, the dominating crystal size etc in the rock.

The concrete for the dam was of two types. The concrete closer than 1,5 meter from the surface was a frost resistant surface concrete with d_maks 60 mm. The rest was an inner concrete with dmaks 120 mm. In the surface concrete there was 210 kg cement per m³ and in the inner concrete 150 kg, in addition to that 16 kg silica fumes for both. The cement contained 30% fly ash. The demand for characteristic strength of the surface concrete was 30 MPa and for the inner concrete 25 MPa.

The normal construction concrete that was made was a C30 quality with dmaks 22 mm and 325 kg cement per m³.

The experiences with the production and the use of this concrete can be summed up like this; to the object the concrete was used to, nothing important was different from what it had been with corresponding concrete produced from natural sand and gravel. More bad shape and texture was to a certain extent compensated by a very good control with the grading of the aggregate. The grading for the dam concrete was very similar to a Füller curve. For the grading for the normal construction concrete a curve with a particle step was used. A great deal of the construction concrete with dmaks 22 mm was pumped.

TWO CASES

„ THE CONCRETE DAM ”FØRREVASSDAMMEN” 1982-1986

„ NORSK STEIN 1993

ODD HOTVEDT

FØRREVASSDAMMEN

FØRREVASSDAMMEN

„ ARCH + GRAVIDITY DAM

„ LENGTH: 1.300 m

„ HEIGHT: 96 m

„ VOLUME: 255.000 m³

NO NATURAL AGGREGATE AVAILABLE !

FØRREVASSDAMMEN

INNER CONCRETE

„ D_max= 120 mm

„ 150 kg cement with 30% fly ash per m³

„ 16 kg silica fumes per m³

„ 25 MPa

SURFACE CONCRETE

„ D_max= 60 mm

„ 210 k t ith 30% fl h ³

„ 210 kg cement with 30% fly ash per m³

„ 16 kg silica fumes per m³

„ 30 MPa Crushed ice !

FØRREVASSDAMMEN

NORMAL CONSTRUCTION CONCRETE

„ D_max= 22 mm

„ 325 kg cement per m³

„ 16 kg silica (?) fumes per m³

„ 30 MPa

50 000 m³ partial pumped 50.000 m³, partial pumped

AGGREGATE PRODUCTION

„ Rock: Gneiss-granite

„ 3 crushing steps

„ 3. step:

• Horisontal impact crucher, Hazemag APK 1313

• Periphery speed: 30 – 55 m/s

( Alternative was Cone crusher + Rod mill ? )

FØRREVASSDAMMEN

SEPARATION

6 fractions: 0,04 / 1 mm (0,06 / 1 mm) 1 / 4 mm

4 / 10 mm 10 / 30 mm 30 / 60 mm 60 / 120 mm 60 / 120 mm

Total concrete aggregate curve: “ Füller curve”

SEPARATION PROCESS

Wet process:

„ Normal wet screening down to 4 mm cut

„ Rheax column at 1 mm cut

„ Cyclones + lamella classifiers at 0,04 mm cut

FØRREVASSDAMMEN

FØRREVASSDAMMEN

FØRREVASSDAMMEN

EXPERIENCES

„ No particular by reason of manufactured sand !

„ Some bleeding – some lack of fines in 0,04 – 1 mm

„ Some over- production of 1 / 4 mm

„ Much work and costs at the impact crusher (wearing parts - manganese). Alternatives included investment cost probably worse !

FØRREVASSDAMMEN

FØRREVASSDAMMEN

NORSK STEIN 1993

Construction of new crushing plant with stock and berth facilities

Basis:

„ Requirement for much concrete (2.000 m³?)

„ Long distance to ready mixed plant (expensive !)

„ Crushed material available (0/2, 2/5, 5/8, 8/11, 11/16, 16/22 mm)

„ Knowledge and competence for concrete production available in the staff

NORSK STEIN 1993

Goal

„ Produce concrete just good enough for the constructions, as simple and cheap as possible.

Aggregate

„ Rock: Granodioritt / Gneiss-granite

„ Gradings: 0/2, 2/5, 5/8, 8/11, 11/16, 16/22 mm

– 0/2 was not washed or dry processed – Cone crushers in the final crushing step.

– The shape of the fine fractions was not particular good

Concrete production plant:p p

„ Very simple, silos for 3 gradings

„ Production fully certificated

NORSK STEIN 1993

Best result for fresh concrete D max= 22mm with step-grading;

Step: 5 / 8 mm Step: 5 / 8 mm

1. C25, v/c < 0,90, d_max= 22 mm

270 kg cement, Additive: 4 litre Plasticizer admixture (Perlamin P) 2. C35, v/c < 0,60, d_max= 22 mm

300 kg cement, Additive: 4 litre Superplasticizer admixture (Perlamin F) 3. C65, v/c < 0,45, d_max= 22 mm

425 kg cement, Additive: 4,5 litre Plasticizer + 4,5 litre Superplasticizer

„ It worked !

„ It worked !

„ The C65 – recipe gave tough consistence, but was workable

„ No particular effort was necessary by pouring

„ Pumping was not tried

that fit the market needs, Recommending the most cost effective solution for a given customer and application is a complex procedure with many aspects. We will highlight three important aspects in our presentations.

Presentations:

1. Example of how to evaluate shape of fine aggregate

In this presentation, Jouni Mahonen will give the background to the NZ flow cone and present results that indicate that the level of fines will have impact on results on flow time and void content of fine aggregate. These are important parameters for how the sand will perform in concrete

2.Barmac / HP sand Case in US

This presentation by Jarmo Eloranta will look at results from a recent test in USA where a Barmac VSI crusher and HP type cone crusher were compared in performance from different aspects. Aspects like yield of sand, power consumption, amount of fines

produced and shape of the sand. Since there is no internationally recognized and widely used standard for evaluating shape, the NZ flow cone test method was used.

3. Air Classification. A method to to adjust fine aggregate gradation

Manufactured sand, especially sand with very good shape properties, have a higher level of fines (minus 125 micron) than what is required in most concrete mix designs.

The conventional way to reduce the amount of fines in fine aggregate has been by washing. In recent years however dry classification has entered the market as a strong alternative. Sven-Henrik Norman will present Metso’s solution for air classification.

Conclusion:

The production technology for manufactuing sand/fine aggregate for concrete is more advanced than normal production of aggregates, but still incorporates the same basic crushing and screening equipment. With the addition of classification tools are available for production of high quality manufactured sand for concrete.

Metso Minerals would like to see development of test methods for fine aggregate. As an

Tests run during May and August 2006 g y g (Soft rock)

Jarmo Eloranta

Tests August 2006

•

•

•

Flow sheet

60.0 70.0

30.0 40.0

% 50.0

0.0 10.0 20.0

0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00

mm

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P

Q R S T U V W X Y Z AA BB CC DD EE

© Metso

3 Date/Title/Author

Q R S T U V W X Y Z AA BB CC DD EE

Product

Crusher productp

90,0 100,0

60,0 70,0 80,0

20 0 30,0 40,0

% 50,0

0,0 10,0 20,0

0 01 0 10 1 00 10 00 100 00

0,01 0,10 1,00 10,00 100,00

HP100 O 87 47.3 1.84 40 % 51 % 9 % 24.1 3.61 B 1" x 1/4" 1100 0.38" NA NA 1.60 28.2 41.8 46.8

HP100 P 56 29 4 1 90 51 % 41 % 8 % 12 1 4 65 B 1" x 1/4" 1200 0 38" NA NA 1 31 28 2 41 8 45 9

HP100 P 56 29.4 1.90 51 % 41 % 8 % 12.1 4.65 B 1 x 1/4 1200 0.38 NA NA 1.31 28.2 41.8 45.9

HP100 Q 111 46 2.41 41 % 50 % 8 % 23.0 4.83 B 1" x 1/4" 1000 0.38" NA NA 1.55 29.1 41.8 46.6

HP100 R 83 36.3 2.29 51 % 40 % 9 % 14.5 5.72 C 1" x 1/4" 1100 0.44" NA NA 1.29 30.5 42.1 47.4

B9100 S 505 145.7 3.47 29 % 60 % 11 % 87.4 5.78 A 1" x 1/4" 55 NA 0 % 3-p Deep 1.56 25.2 38.0 44.6

B9100 T 500 136.9 3.65 25 % 63 % 12 % 86.2 5.80 A 1" x 1/4" 60 NA 0 % 3-p Deep 1.30 25.8 38.0 44.8

B9100 U 500 141.4 3.54 22 % 66 % 12 % 93.3 5.36 A 1" x 1/4" 65 NA 0 % 3-p Deep 1.43 25.5 37.8 44.0

B9100 V 495 150.4 3.29 28 % 61 % 12 % 91.7 5.40 A 1" x 1/4" 60 NA 10 % 3-p Deep NA 26.2 37.9 43.7

B9100 W 498 158.1 3.15 27 % 61 % 12 % 96.4 5.16 A 1" x 1/4" 60 NA 20 % 3-p Deep 1.56 26.3 38.4 45.1

HP100 X 63 90 9 0 69 76 % 20 % 4 % 18 2 3 47 D 3/8" 1/8" 1100 0 48" NA NA 1 07 33 6 39 5 43 6

HP100 X 63 90.9 0.69 76 % 20 % 4 % 18.2 3.47 D 3/8" x 1/8" 1100 0.48" NA NA 1.07 33.6 39.5 43.6

HP100 Y 83 89.5 0.93 71 % 24 % 4 % 21.5 3.86 D 3/8" x 1/8" 1100 0.44" NA NA 1.10 31 40.0 44.2

HP100 Z 63 82.7 0.76 74 % 22 % 3 % 18.2 3.46 D 3/8" x 1/8" 1200 0.44" NA NA 1.09 33.7 39.7 44.3

HP100 AA 111 82.7 1.34 67 % 27 % 6 % 22.3 4.97 D 3/8" x 1/8" 1100 0.38" NA NA 1.16 27.4 40.2 45.1

B9100 BB 500 275.1 1.82 44 % 49 % 7 % 134.8 3.71 E 3/8" x 1/8" 60 NA 0 % 3-p Deep 1.20 25.7 39.0 44.8

B9100 DD 500 172.9 2.89 26 % 63 % 11 % 108.9 4.59 A 5/8" x 0 60 NA 0 % 3-p Deep 1.40 24.2 38.3 44.5

B9100 EE 500 163.2 3.06 25 % 64 % 12 % 104.4 4.79 A 5/8" x 0 65 NA 0 % 3-p Deep 1.32 24 37.5 44.0

*C33 production values taken from running screen underesize gradation through Bruno with a screen setup to produce a sand within the specification ASTM C33 man. Sand. 100% screen efficiency was used. Gate used on mid-deck of C,D,E setups. Horsepower for HP tests are calculated from amps observed and motor efficiency curves for 125 hp WEG motor.

%Mid-Deck Bottom Deck

Middle Deck Top Deck

Bruno Screen Setup

In next pages this data sorted according to different criteria and graphs are

© Metso

5 Date/Title/Author

A B C D

E 0.111"

0.0234"

NA NA 0.111"

0.093"

0.093"

0.093" 0.0029"

0.0029"

0.0234"

0.0234"

NA 25 % 0.0029"

0.0029"

65 % 35 % 0.0029"

%Mid Deck Bottom Deck

Middle Deck Top Deck

NA

criteria and graphs are drawn

See last slide in presentation

Sand production %

P d ti f ASTM C33 S S d

Crusher Test Oper.

HP Screen Undersi ze (STPH)

HP/Ton Screen Undersiz

e

% Coarse Waste

%C33 Sand

% Fine Waste

STPH of C33 Sand

HP/Ton of C33

Sand Feed Speed*

CSS (in)

Casca

de Rotor RR 80 aver flow time (s)

% voids

ASTM

% voids

B9100 U 500 141.4 3.54 22 % 66 % 12 % 93.3 5.36 1" x 1/4" 65 NA 0 % 3-p Deep 1.43 25.5 37.8 44.0

B9100 EE 500 163.2 3.06 25 % 64 % 12 % 104.4 4.79 5/8" x 0 65 NA 0 % 3-p Deep 1.32 24 37.5 44.0

B9100 L 490 145 9 3 36 26 % 63 % 12 % 91 9 5 33 1" x 1/4" 55 NA 0 % 4 p Deep 1 44 27 3 38 3 44 7

Production of ASTM C33 Spec Sand

B9100 L 490 145.9 3.36 26 % 63 % 12 % 91.9 5.33 1" x 1/4" 55 NA 0 % 4-p Deep 1.44 27.3 38.3 44.7

B9100 N 495 129.8 3.81 24 % 63 % 14 % 81.8 6.05 1" x 1/4" 65 NA 0 % 4-p Deep 1.47 24.7 38.0 43.1

B9100 T 500 136.9 3.65 25 % 63 % 12 % 86.2 5.80 1" x 1/4" 60 NA 0 % 3-p Deep 1.30 25.8 38.0 44.8

B9100 DD 500 172.9 2.89 26 % 63 % 11 % 108.9 4.59 5/8" x 0 60 NA 0 % 3-p Deep 1.40 24.2 38.3 44.5

B9100 C 500 158.4 3.16 25 % 62 % 13 % 98.2 5.09 5/8" x 0 65 NA 0 % 3-p Std. 1.28 25.4 37.8 43.5

B9100 F 495 176.9 2.80 26 % 62 % 11 % 109.7 4.51 5/8" x 0 60 NA 0 % 4-p Deep 1.33 25.5 38.2 44.3

B9100 M 490 138.5 3.54 26 % 62 % 12 % 85.9 5.71 1" x 1/4" 60 NA 0 % 4-p Deep 1.79 27.2 38.3 44.0

B9100 A 490 158.6 3.09 27 % 61 % 12 % 96.7 5.06 5/8" x 0 60 NA 0 % 3-p Std.p 1.30 25.5 38.7 43.6

B9100 V 495 150.4 3.29 28 % 61 % 12 % 91.7 5.40 1" x 1/4" 60 NA 10 % 3-p Deep NA 26.2 37.9 43.7

B9100 W 498 158.1 3.15 27 % 61 % 12 % 96.4 5.16 1" x 1/4" 60 NA 20 % 3-p Deep 1.56 26.3 38.4 45.1

B9100 B 490 171.8 2.85 29 % 60 % 11 % 103.1 4.75 5/8" x 0 55 NA 0 % 3-p Std. 1.20 26.1 38.3 44.0

B9100 E 495 184.4 2.68 29 % 60 % 11 % 110.6 4.47 5/8" x 0 55 NA 0 % 4-p Deep 1.34 25.4 38.6 46.5

B9100 S 505 145.7 3.47 29 % 60 % 11 % 87.4 5.78 1" x 1/4" 55 NA 0 % 3-p Deep 1.56 25.2 38.0 44.6

HP100 O 87 47.3 1.84 40 % 51 % 9 % 24.1 3.61 1" x 1/4" 1100 0.38" NA NA 1.60 28.2 41.8 46.8

HP100 Q 111 46 2.41 41 % 50 % 8 % 23.0 4.83 1" x 1/4" 1000 0.38" NA NA 1.55 29.1 41.8 46.6

HP100 J 51 30 6 1 67 44 % 49 % 7 % 15 0 3 40 5/8" 0 1200 0 44" NA NA 1 15 29 3 41 7 45 1

HP100 J 51 30.6 1.67 44 % 49 % 7 % 15.0 3.40 5/8" x 0 1200 0.44" NA NA 1.15 29.3 41.7 45.1

B9100 BB 500 275.1 1.82 44 % 49 % 7 % 134.8 3.71 3/8" x 1/8" 60 NA 0 % 3-p Deep 1.20 25.7 39.0 44.8

HP100 H 57 30.8 1.85 49 % 44 % 7 % 13.6 4.21 5/8" x 0 1100 0.44" NA NA 1.13 28.2 41.5 43.8

HP100 P 56 29.4 1.90 51 % 41 % 8 % 12.1 4.65 1" x 1/4" 1200 0.38" NA NA 1.31 28.2 41.8 45.9

HP100 R 83 36.3 2.29 51 % 40 % 9 % 14.5 5.72 1" x 1/4" 1100 0.44" NA NA 1.29 30.5 42.1 47.4

HP100 I 69 44 1.57 57 % 36 % 6 % 15.8 4.36 5/8" x 0 1100 0.44" NA NA 1.18 * * 44.7

HP100 AA 111 82.7 1.34 67 % 27 % 6 % 22.3 4.97 3/8" x 1/8" 1100 0.38" NA NA 1.16 27.4 40.2 45.1

HP100 Y 83 89.5 0.93 71 % 24 % 4 % 21.5 3.86 3/8" x 1/8" 1100 0.44" NA NA 1.10 31 40.0 44.2

HP100 Y 83 89.5 0.93 71 % 24 % 4 % 21.5 3.86 3/8 x 1/8 1100 0.44 NA NA 1.10 31 40.0 44.2